How To Rebut Gripes

Rebuttals should address reasons it is not a valid gripe, and should not accuse the gripe of being "silly" or "stupid."

Wouldn't it make sense to let the player use turn signals and put on hazard lights while they are driving! It would be more realistic then.
And, it would be good if random ambulances just drove around, making the player have to move over to the side of the road.
Plus, when you are driving an emergency vehicle, have you seen the way cars move out of the way! It is pretty unrealistic, the way they do it! I hope GTA 5 includes these!

What's with all the "beater" cars on the roads in LC? I feel this detracts from realism, as when cars get into that state (panels missing, dents, etc.), they're taken to be scrapped. It would be unsafe and uneconomical to drive them.
I totally understand where you are coming from, but I just like to think the people in Liberty are to cheap to buy a new one. And plus, I think if Liberty Citizens cared about safety, they wouldn't be living there!

GTA 4 is not as cool as GTA SA

San Andreas had everything rock star had learned at that point in the game.Some(me)would say there was to much in the game.Give it some time and rock star will come out with a game thats to big for both ps3 and xbox 360.--Panzercat39 21:23, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

This gripe should be removed. It has nothing to do with vehicles.

Why is it that the Police Stinger is only in multiplayer and not singleplayer? I was a little disappointed when I didn't have it to feature in my videos.

Film your videos on multiplayer?

What if I want the nice car in my parking lot for the citizens of Liberty City to see and I can see it every time I emerge from my house?

Why is it that in a game that focuses on being realistic, that the character can fly a helicopter without a license or any kind of experience?

In his home country Niko was trained to fly helicopters as a soldier. As for a license, why would he care about having a liccense when he has no compuction about breaking into and stealing other vehicles?

Luis HAS a license. If you look in his safehouse, there's a certificate from Higgins Helitours.

If the player would have to have a license, the game would not be fun and another ass would consider GTA SA better than IV.

When causing destruction in an invincible securicar, I find it annoying when I am launched out of the window after experiencing a head on crash with another vehicle, especially a SWAT van. Was it too much to ask for seatbelts or airbags?

Ultraussie here, It wouldve been too much of an hassle to put different seabelts animations for different vehicles, but airbags would be OK. Seriously, would be be launched out of the windscreen? Not likely. You have to travel over the dashboard and stfuf, and remember your feet are under the dashboard at the pedals....

I agree. Sure, if you're jacking a car while the cops are hot on your tail, then I'm sure that Niko or Johnny would not have time to put on a seat belt, but the least they can do is making an airbag deploy during a head-on collision...isn't that standard on cars nowadays? There is no chance that you will get thrown out the windshield unless you are less than five feet tall and are sitting in the back without a seat belt.

That is soo true. They could make it so if you wait 3 secs or something at a standstill, then you fasten your Seatbelt automatically. And if you wanna take out it takes sligtly longer. But I think carjacking someone wearing a seatbelt would be harder, I mean, you have to reach across to unbuckle the belt, imagine what they could do to ya then...

think about it if you had an airbag, even a small colision would deploy them. It would be impracticle you would half to stuff the airbag down and imagine if you were avoiding the police it would take to much time and to much space to animate the scene.

"that the character can fly a helicopter without a license or any kind of experience?" Niko does have helicopter flying experience. In the first mission featuring helicopter usage (can't remember, but IIRC it was a UL Paper mission) he states something along the lines of, "It's been awhile since I've flown one of these in the war." Indicating that, at some time and point in the Bosnian war, he likely flew a helicopter.

Being launched was designed as punishment for reckless driving. It says so in its page.

Crashing on a motorcycle and bailing out of a car aren't fun anymore, and often result in death.

Once more, the game is meant to be more realistic.

But even though you were wearing a helmet, you'd still die from the crash. The game really lacks realistic attempts.

A helmet does not protect your entire body which means that bike crashes are still realistic.

About 10 sec knocked out player will be better.

And if the players arms are broken?

Bailing out isn't just "not fun" anymore, it's completely redundant. The main reason I would bail out is generally if the car is on fire, yet you jump out and roll alongside the car at the exact same speed until it explodes right next to you, resulting in death every time. Or if you're heading straight for a wall or something you'll just fly into it anyway and probably take MORE damage that you would have had you not bailed out. Why include such a completely useless feature?

There are trained stunt people who know how to bail out of a moving vehicle and come out with only minor bruises. Niko or Johnny arent trained stunt people, but the skill couldve been learnt?

You try jumping out of a car, and then tell me if you stop the second you touch the ground. It is called "tucking and rolling" for a reason. You roll along side the car because of your momentum from being inside the car moving at X mph. Therefore, when you jump out of the car moving at X mph, you will roll at X mph, slowing down as you hit the ground. However, you will eventually slow down to a stop. The car will take longer to stop, because it is on wheels, and does not have the slowing effects of being smacked against the ground. When you hit the wall because of jumping out of the car, it will hurt, because you jumped out of the car at, say, 100 mph. That would be approx. half of the speed of the (average) terminal velocity of a human, which is around 200mph. The human body hitting something at 100mph (and in many cases in GTA IV, over 150mph), would result in either serious injury, if not death. The human body hitting anything (well, anything big enough) at 200mph would mean instant death. No exceptions. Ah, physics. Aren't they just grand?

}Yeah, thats REALLY cool and you're SO smart, but remember, GTA IV is a video game. Something that is sold for the sole purpose to be enjoyed, not to be super realisitc. If jumping out of a car, which was fun to do and did its job in earlier games, now kills the player and causes annoyance, its feature is now pretty useless.

First thing's first, your post up there should be a gripe, not a rebuttal. However, please do excuse me if I did this thing called "paying attention" in school. God forbid there should be smart people on the internet. The sad part is that most of what I said up there was done with this thing called "common sense". In the simplest possible terms, if you hit something fast enough, you're gonna go splat. The difference between hitting something at 6 MPH vs 200 MPH is the same as the difference between falling off a 5 foot wall and falling off the roof of a skyscraper (and, obviously, hitting the ground over 300 feet below (approximately 30 stories, so that's not a very big sky scraper, but it will have the same effect). Though I do realize that video games are supposed to be fun. I've only been playing them since I was a little kid. Yes, I agree, it would be more fun if it was harder to get yourself killed that way. I've been in many situations where I hit a wall 5 feet from where my burning car hits, and end up getting blown to kingdom come because of it. However, Rockstar was trying to make this game more realistic. However, getting to see a big splat when you fall of a building and die would make that aspect of the game more fun, but, unfortunately, would probably offend people (and again, God forbid that Rockstar offends anyone).

"The human body hitting anything (well, anything big enough) at 200mph would mean instant death. No exceptions. Ah, physics." Is that so? Well, for someone to claim he knows so much about physics and that such a feat is IMPOSSIBLE (remember: "No exceptions"), you're dead wrong. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTfKJFrUi9w Notice all the safety equipment that guy had on! Wow! A helmet AND a racing suit. And somehow impacting the EARTH at 200 miles per hour (I hope the earth is "big enough" for you) with no more than what Niko wears in game DIDN'T KILL HIM. My god, did we discover Superman in disguise here? Now, granted, he was hurt. And hurt bad. Then again, Niko can survive being thrown 50 feet from a CAR EXPLOSION. So... realistic? Nonsense, I say.

San Andreas is the best for bailing out of moving vehicles. You don't lose any health no matter what speed. I miss those times.

If you still stuck in 2004, STOP. In real life, bailing out a motorcycle would certainly result in death. That’s why GTA IV rocks. If you can’t accept realism and like fun, you should play Spongebob or one of those DreamWorks crappy video games.

Whenever you crash you go flying out of the windshield.

Well, the game designers are trying to be more close to reality. I always found it to be extremely far-fetched that Claude, Tommy Vercetti, and Carl Johnson could slam into a brick wall at 100+ MPH and emerge without a scratch.

Not EVERYTIME. Unless it's a high speed crash into an unmovable object(Pole for examples) You would fly out, but if you crashed slower or in a different angle, you would not fall out of the car.

The "flying out of a windshield" thing is seemingly random. I hit a taxicab head-on at a moderate speed, and flew out the windshield. I hit another taxicab head-on at full speed, and didn't fly out.

All depends on the angle. Take trigonometry and it shall be explained to you.

While your getting college majrs, take game development. That will explain all the inconsistancies in R*'s realisticnesses (mainly laziness).

I already said it above; you will not get launched out a windshield in real life if you're driving in the front seat, since you blocked by an airbag, (hopefully) a seatbelt, and your feet are underneath the dashboard. In real life, you won't be launched out of the windshield unless you are sitting in the back seat, without a seat belt on, and are under five feet tall. Therefore, six foot tall guys like Niko and Johnny won't be launched out the windshield even if they sit in the back.

Cars explode for the stupidest and unrealistic reasons, i.e. shooting the window of a car, shooting the roof.

I thought GTA IV was about "realism." I guarantee firing a shotgun shell at the windowsill of a car in real-life will not cause it to catch fire.

If GTA was realistic you would go to jail after your first kill and stay there.

If it's not realistic, then why are we bound by ammo restrictions and features designed to increase reality vut wind up breaking both suspension of disbeleaf and the fun factor?

The fact that cars still explode unrealistically is proof that GTA IV isn't a realistic game.

Has it ever been? It just strayed into a little realism. It has never been and will never be full realism. It is a game, after all.

Cars exploding realistically should have been part of that "little realism".

Glitches are the answer to mistakes in a game.

Dude, what are you talking about? Cars only catch fire if the engine or gas tank (rear wheel well on most cars and tanks on most truck's sides) are shot. Try making a car explode by just shooting its roof. Don't listen to those other rebuts.

IT's still unrealistic because if you shot a cars gas tank in real life the car would not explode even if you were using incendinary bullets.

A car will only detonate if you actually shoot the body or interior. If you shoot the window, there's always the chance you are hitting the interior as you do so.

No car surfing! In previous GTA games you could stowaway on top of a moving vehicle and ride it to it's destination. Now, if you stand or squat on top of a vehicle and it moves, you tumble off like a quadriplegic. Not very realistic.

If you're talking about realism, then it is quite impossible for someone to stand on top of a moving car without falling over.

Impossible? It depends on speed. If you can't hang on to a car moving at 5MPH, then yo are an epic failure. If you can hold on to that same car going 100MPH, your using teh l33t hax. In real life. So yeah...

Riding on a flat roof or in the back of a pickup is possible.

While standing straight up? I don't think so. Go try it yourself and see what happens.

Not while standing up, obviously. Niko can crouch. I escaped the cops in previous games by jumping onto the backs of passing trucks.

IDK, its something to do with IV's new Rage and Euphoria engines. I loved hopping on the backs of trucks and then shooting the actual truck so the guy drives like hell and crashes... But seriously, If you crouch in a pickup truck bed irl at high speed, there isnt much chance of falling out. But also, IRL, if you tried to carsurf on some random person, Dont you think the person would be a little angry at you for hopping on their ride?

Tanks would be unrealistic, as the armed forces would not send a tank into New York City after a single man. Airplanes would also be unrealistic because air-travel around New York City is extremely restricted, plus there's really not enough area to need air-travel.

Tanks are realistic. There is a tank only 5 blocks from my house. Besides, this is GTA. It is very unrealistic that one man could evade the police force of an entire city.

Tanks and airplanes are more realistic than being released from custody hours after being arrested for mass murder/terrorism. If omissions are to be made for the sake of realism then there must be a level of consistency.

Even if tanks and airplanes are more realistic, it still doesn't make sense to send in the military to take out one man. Its a city, not a warzone.

Airplanes can be used to destroy helicopters. Or Rockstar could place an aircaft carrier, that would make it more realistic.

New York City has an aircraft carrier, the USS Intrepid, that is a floating museum. Such a thing would fit in Liberty City.

Liberty City is only modeled after New York City, and doesn't have every bit of detail.

Tanks were a fun addition to the gameplay of GTA games. Besides, if you have a six-star wanted level, you'll
be like a terrorist, so the army should come and bring tanks with them in case you're in a car.

I agree with the airplanes, as long as you have to go and find some sought of key so you can fly it::::::::::::::::and do you see the army go to 9/11 no so army going into cities is actually illegal that is why the police have swat

A typical civilian would have no idea on how to operate a tank properly, so it made sense for Rockstar to omit the Rhino.

But Niko isn't a civilian. He severed in war if you can recall!

True, but more than likely, joining the Yugoslav Wars as a teenager, Niko may not have been trained to operate a tank.

This is to balance gameplay. Having tanks in, say, multiplayer would cause major power imbalances. The Buzzard and APC already cause this problem, why add aircraft and tanks to the mix?

There are no car mods or even simply choosing your paint color.

There are special editions of cars. The Pay 'n' Spray is suppose to be colour matching, but somehow they just did not do it. lol

Car mods are necessary, because there are races.

Last I checked, the color of a car was not vital, nor even tied, to its success in a race.

It gets annoying when you really want a colour for yourself, and also if you want a spoiler on the back. couldnt it be cool if it helped with aerodynamics?

GTA isn't a car modding game. Car modding was only seen in San Andreas as a feature, and not in any other GTA game.

The game is called Grand Theft Auto and a majority of it is driving so why not have the ability to customize cars?

Why spend $30k or so on a car that's probably going to blow up after a few minutes anyway? Just use the Sultan RS.

so where else i can spend my money when i have 2 millions and without cheats?? you people doesn't understand that smalls features like this entertain yourself and makes the game more fun after all its all about complex and fun. so imagine a game like gta iv but whit more more more features... It WILL BE AMAZING!

I agree. It's fun making fun of others in bad automobiles, simply by hydraulics. The NPC does have dialogues including words and phrases like "move" and "get out of the way". The Sultan RS is a good car, but too ricer.

Niko is supposed to be near-broke in the storyline, so that doesn't leave much room for pimpin' his ride.

i think th car modding in san andreas was testing for a bigger, better car modding in another game

The yellow boxes in front of safehouses are stupid and poorly made. Often AI traffic hits them as they're driving, causing the saved cars to disappear. Garages were much better and safer, and less chance of cars disappearing.

Parking spaces are more likely of what you will have instead of a garage. Most preferably a whole car park or something, but not a garage of your own in some poor old space. In Algonquin, probably, but it just wastes too much space of the area. It's simply what everyone will think in real life.

In real life you would have a range of parking options. A garage, or parking space in a multi-deck or underground car park is more realistic, even valet parking. The fact that every safe house just happens to have the same yellow area out the front is just another thing that detracts from the realism. Especially given that in a lot of cases there are no other cars parked in the street. Where do the other residents in the building park?

It's possible that these residents are currently at their day job, or maybe hanging out with friends, shopping, etc. After all, there ARE a lot of cars on the road constantly.

Those friends must be as demanding as Niko's if the people absolutely never get home.

Wait, you're saying that there are NO garages in NYC? Cuz I know for a fact that there are. And a garage wouldn't waste space, simply remove thet building next to the safehouse to make a garage space. Simple.

Garage Spaces are a pretty good idea, except there are NO garages now. They shouldve had atleast a mixture of parking spaces/garages.

Garages would be more common at an Alderney safehouse. I've pulled up to a few garages in Westdyke and Leftwood and the garage opened. Why not have that for the Safehouse Niko has in Alderney.

No "R3" Missions for anything other than the police cruiser.

Would you really want a convicted felon driving an ambulance?

They didn't want him driving the police cruiser either. I fail to see your point.

Maybe not an ambulance, but maybe a taxi or an ice cream truck.

Also, Niko hasn't been convicted of anything.

Why don't you look up Niko Bellic on the ploice computers?

Because there IS'NT any database about Niko in the police computers. Not in any police cars, nor in the LCPD site at Tw@t.

Actually there is if you go to the LCPD website and click on the gray bar on the bottom of the page you will enter the LCPD database in which you can find any characters criminal record.

I have found something on the LCPD Database on Roman and Niko. it says Niko was convicted of Grand Theft Auto in 2008. Roman was convicted for something with gambling.

Niko arrived in LC in 2008. 2008, also, was when the game was released, right? And Grand Theft Auto is the title. That's the whole point. I agree with the first Griper. It'd be fun to do some missions like that, or at least to be able to run over people with your ambulance, stuff them in the back, and take them to the hospital.

There are not enough special vehicles like golf carts, lawn mowers, and bicycles. Bicycles are common in NYC, why not Liberty City?

I guess Rockstar just left them out because it'd be too much of a pain getting around on a bicycle: streets rammed with cars and pedestrians, and we all remember how fiddly the bikes were to control in San Andreas, don't we? You'd be on your arse every two minutes. Not to mention how huge the playing area is.

They could correct the bikes, set few people to use them and etc.

Although I see your point, that's completely contrary to your statement in the beginning of your gripe "Bicycles are common in NYC". If they are common setting few people to use them would be a mistake because then it would give people like you something to complain about.

I'm pretty sure he meant "a few". As in, about 10 or 20%. Don't be so ticked at him for leaving out the word "a". Neil Armstrong did it, too.

There are fewer cars in the game compared to San Andreas, and no fixed-wing aircraft available to the player. Even though the city is smaller than GTA San Andreas, the designers of the game shouldn't have lost more stuff than they put in, that includes Vehicles and Planes. Just a general mistake on behalf of Rockstar

No there are more cars in GTA IV then in San Andreas. More choices.

The variety of vehicles is greatly reduced. This limits the players experience and hurts the overall playability of the free roam game.

Only so many cars can be made to fit in a huge game like GTA IV.

Frankly, I thought there were too many cars in San Andreas. Especially bland four door sedans and two-door coupes. They added many boring cars that are similar in looks and performance to many others, some of which rare in most places so you usually don't see them anyway. (Not that you'd miss them) For examples: The Intruder, the Willard, the Vincent, the Sunrise, the Previon, the Primo, the Emperor, the Nebula, the Bravura, the Cadrona. There are also too many specialty vehicles. The Mower, for example, could have been fun, but the blades don't appear to have any effect on anything so it's quite pointless. Or the Tug. Then of course there's a crapton of light trucks that you almost never see.

I don't see whats wrong with more variety, especially how every car has unique handling. Yet in GTA IV you already got some vehicles that look very similar yet there are unfilled holes in the variety (heavy emphasis on light pickup trucks).

How the Voodoo was changed.

That's your opinion.

In my opinion, Rockstar really blew-it by ruining a perfectly good muscle car with Hydraulics. Now, its just as useless as the perennial.

Again, that's your opinion, something not usually taken into account for a product to be released to millions of people.

For Pete's sake, posting your opinion is the whole point of the entire page!

The need for getting somewhere quickly has been taken care of with taxis. Besides, trains are a bit of a pain in the ass: they're rooted to one, erm, route. What is there to do on a train other than hopefully crash it into another one (and die) or go so fast you fly off the tracks (and die)?

Maybe they should make the train more real, I mean you could walk inside the train, use emergency stop, that's just my opinion.

I agree!!! They should have more people too.

Not everyone uses the subway, and taking Taxi's places are faster, which is why there are so little people on the subway.

It's now replace with the Annihilator which is faster but lacks rockets.

The Hunter should have been left in anyway. Since GTAIV isn't as realistic as it seems, an iconic helicopter like the Hunter should have stayed in the game as an option, even if it doesn't fit.

By 2008, the Hunter model would be out of date, and so, out with the old, in with the new.

The "Hunter" is still in service. The gatling guns are extremely unrealistic. They fire too slow to be useful.

The Hunter is based on the AH-64A, which is still in service. I live in NY and I dont even see UH-60s/Annihilators buzzing over here, now you wanna get an Apache involed for pete sakes.

I live in a small town. I saw 3 AH-64D Apaches fly over, not to mention 1 US Army cargo chopper. also, they are bringing back a chopper smilar to the hunter in The Ballad of Gay Tony called the buzzard. It does have rockets and Miniguns, but its not based off of an Apache.

When Niko steers the car in any direction, the steering wheel doesn't move at all, which left Rockstar Games no explanation to this problem.

At least the car turns.

But not the steering wheel. It's hardly even realistic to see how the car turns into any direction, but not the steering wheel.

Not every detail can be made. Let us see you make a game like GTA IV and get every detail you miss, and see if it can fit on one disc.

And I checked, the steering wheel Niko holds onto does turn.

As far as I know, the steering wheel did not turn in ANY of the gta games. You would think that R* would add something small like that to the game? no. And also, there are many, very small details that are hard to see(people checking the rearview mirror and so on), and the steering doesn't turn, which is more noticeable.

Airbags do not deploy on any vehicles when slammed head-on at high speeds.

That just brings out the fun of the new physics engine, seeing Niko fly out of the car. Plus I don't really think that it really has to be this realistic. It would just ruin the fact that this is a GAME.

Another area where realism is affected. If realism is to be the justification for limiting the players experience then anything unrealistic becomes a criticism of the game.

Airbags are turned off or removed, they are just liabilities to some people.

Realism is all well and good but it can reach a level which removes all fun from the game and renders it almost unplayable. Airbags without seatbelts will kill people in high speed crashes, so would you like it if every driver in Liberty City used their seatbelts and you couldn't jack anything?

I'm with the OP. If the game is set in 2006-2008, then why not at least have the pedestrian vehicles' airbags deploy?

You can't attach trailers in the back of your truck like in GTA San Andreas.

What would you do exactly with a trailer on the back of your truck?

Gas Tank trailers, Containers, Car Transporters, etc.

Limits the scope of possibilities in the free roam game. Shortens the lifespan of the game. The RS Haul Missions in SA could provide hours of game play on their own.

Why would Niko be a tow trucker to get money? It seems like he would want to kill himself if he had that job.

Niko is doing anything he can for money (it is the whole point of the story, just in case you forgot), so if he just has to drive a truck around to cash, I don't see why not.

Brucie's helicopter is useless. It would have been better if you could fly his helicopter yourself.

But how would you acquire it? Stealing? I don't steal from friends.

Have fun stealing from Brucie and having him pissed at you, and take away the helicopter. That is why you can't steal his helicopter.

All you need to do to jack Brucies chopper is shoot him in the head when he's waiting for you to get in.

There are only two unique helicopters in the game, and only 1 of them is armed.

Although this is a slight retraction of realism, GTA IV is not solely based on helicopters, nor is it centered around aircraft travel / usage. Besides, how common are the helicopters when not spawned, anyways?

They will have 4 unique choppers in The Ballad of Gay tony. 2 are new, and 2 are armed. the 1st armed one is old.

Rare vehicles aren't here anymore.

There is a Sultan RS which is a rare car. Also the Infernus is rare.

Both cars are extremely rare and are only found online multiplayers. The Comet is nowhere to be seen again, which led me to a huge disappointment, since the Comet is my favorite car.

It depends on where you are looking for it and what you are driving at that time. You could always spawn your Comet using a cheat code(Which does not affect anything)

So first you complain that there are no rare cars, then you learn they exist but are pissed you can't find them. Do you know what rare means?

Both the Infernus and Comet are given to Niko during the story, and the Sultan RS can still be found in singleplayer in the same spot.

You can't go fast when driving boats because even the smallest wave will completely slow you down.

Use the left analog stick to judge the waves. When a wave is coming towards you, push it down. This will raise the nose of the boat and will increase the speed of the boat.

Ok, thanks.

Another realism feature. I am an NYC boater and the waves do more than slow me down. Lost 2 hats cause of the water.

No Hydraulics.

New York City isn't the huge place for the ghetto, and most low lives in Liberty City can't afford them.

Most low lives couldn't afford a car in the first place, we are talking about the people who can afford cars.

Some car names have been recycled for new cars and the names don't really make sense with the car they resemble anymore.

This adds realism by showing the evolution of cars. The modern crown vic's no longer look the way they did in the 80's, do they?

Yeah but it makes no sense how the Stallion doesn't resemble a Mustang or an Esperanto doesn't resemble an Eldorado from any generation anymore.

Car models change. Look at the Honda Accord from 1998, then the Accord from 2008. See a difference?

This is whats basically happening here, they got a 1998 Accord, called it Concord and in the next game there's an older version based on 1979 Buick Riviera. The name just doesn't go with it (and I'm starting to see this argument is getting pointless).

Have fun coming up with car names then.

No remote controlled vehicles (rc-car/plane etc).

This is a good thing. RC Missions were the absolute worst. I don't see how this is a gripe.

I live in NYC and there are no RC planes here. Besides, with terrorism in LC, someone could have put a bomb on one and boom they are outta here!

all one guy needs to do is fly an RC Baron into the middle floor of a building with a huge bomb, detonate it before the NOOSE/LCPD Bomb squad shows up. KABLAMO! You've just destroyed a building.

No go cart. Not even a go-cart attraction.

Go-Carts were the worst vehicles in San Andreas, I am glad they are gone.

Sorry, I must agree with you on them being crap, but it's still only an opinion. You can't rebut a gripe with nothing more than an opinion.
-SiNdROME

Yeah, you can't rebut a gripe with nothing more than an opinion. You also know what else you can't do? Write your name at the end of every gripe.

Although there is a small go-kart track at the fairgrounds, it's abandoned, and plus, do you see many go-karts in NYC?

Not a lot of people would be driving a Quad on the beach in NYC, would they.

Actually, NYC beaches are popular places to go quad racing at night.

Have fun getting your quad there, if you can.

Most vehicles are very rare like the Infernus which you get only one chance to own, and never see again.

All you have to do to spawn vehicles is drive yours around. I easily spawned 10 Comets by driving mine around. This works with almost any car, truck, or motorcycle.

To see a rare car again, you have to use your own frequently. On my completed game, I have FOUR Infernus-es.

Iconic sports cars like the Stinger and Cheetah are nowhere to be found.

They've been replaced by cars like the Sultan RS and Feltzer.

Your rebuttal is valid, certainly; however, I must agree with the Griper, I'd rather see a Grotti Cheetah/Testarossa than a strange, bastard love child cross between a Lexus IS and Subaru STi... but that's my opinion. The Feltzer's okay, but especially for TBoGT I would have loved to see an R230 updated Feltzer.

How can you own four Infernus cars if there is only one from the parking space. It only appears in online multiplayer, but not single player. Using more than one Infernus counts as cheating and cheating affects the game, so it's better off not to use cheats at all.

Cheating may be undesirable to you, but for some people, it just wouldn't be GTA without cheats.

You can actually get more than one infernus by jacking it during brucie's race missions. Also, if you drive around in an infernus, other infernus's will be seen driving nearby, but it is rare.

You can find an Infernus on the streets; I found one while driving a Pinnacle. It's just very rare.

A vehicle's rarity just adds to the pleasure of actually owning one though! It'd be pretty boring to see nothing but Infernus' and Comets on the street, not to mention unrealistic. And they aren't even that rare, you just need to keep your eye out for them.

Learn to edit files. Did some editing and now Comets are common but taxis dont exist.

How do you get somewhere fast with a press off a few buttons?? Now that you think about it, I'm at Schottler Med. Center. I'm trying to hail a cab without a wanted level and I don't have Roman's Ability, Cabs are NOWHERE TO BE FOUND there.

This may be unrelated, but I was driving around Queens, NY, and I saw a Diablo SV (the car after which the Infernus is modeled) parked, and that's a pretty rare car in real life, so yeah.

Actually, not all vehicles are rare (only the Romero and the Sultan RS is). Just keep completing Stevie's mission, and eventually, he'll text you about the Infernus. It's not hard to find. If you happen to spot one, don't get in the car yet and wait for the drivers in the Infernus cars to appear. If you're lucky, you can carjack the Infernus and store it into your safehouse. Problem solved.

{gripe}{rebut} actualy only the front of the infernus is modeled after the diablo the back is completely ripped from my favorite the Pagani Zonda S

A lot of cars that appear in single player, do not appear in multiplayer.

They aren't best suited for combat. Multiplayer was made for combat, not running around in weak, defenseless vehicles. If you think Rockstar is so lazy, they should have just left multiplayer out of the game so you don't bitch about it.

The Securicar, the Packer, the Benson and the Flatbed are best suited to combat. After all, even if they are trucks, it would be very useful for combat, even if it's not explosion proof.

I'd hardly call the Faggio suited for combat, given you respawn on one of them (usually on desolate streets). It's the weakest vehicle ever.

Only 1 sportbike is in the game, while GTA:SA had about 6 or 7.

There's the PCJ600, NRG900 and a suspicious bike NRG900RR

There's several variations of the NRG900: NRG900, NRG900F, NRG900RR, but that's it. The PCJ600 is old and not as fast, and doesn't look like a sportbike.

NRG 900, Zombie, PCJ600, Faggio

He's talking about sport bikes. The Faggio, Sanchez (counts as the dirt bike), Zombie and PCJ 600 do not count as sport bikes. Too slow and it has very little use to race. The PCJ 600's speed becomes unstable at high speeds. The FCR-900 and the BF-400 are two sports bikes in GTA SA and Rockstar Games removed it without even explaining why.

Rockstar doesn't bother to explain to anyone because they don't want to hear your bitching. New bikes have been made, and some have been removed to make room for the new ones. GTA IV isn't meant to be a copy of San Andreas with a new city and better graphics.

Wow. The last Rebut sounds like some douche wrote, simply so he could disprove whoever wrote the Gripe. Chill. The point of a Gripe is so someone can bitch. Don't like it? Piss off then!

Guys, you only need one or two sports bikes in a game. You don't need 5 or 6. It would be useless to have that many.

If you want lost of bikes, get yourself the Lost and Damned. There's lots of new sports bikes on there, as well as new choppers.

Roofs from vehicles doesn't get crushed when you roll over. There aren't any roll bars from any cars.

Theres a roll cage in the Sultan RS. Also, the roof of a car is supposed to be a very protective part of a car.

But all other cars don't even have roll bars and they're not supposed to stay intact even after a hard landing.

Roofs can be crushed. Being the strongest part of a car, they take a lot of force to crush. A fall off a small building is enough to crumple the roof.

Unlikely. In GTA IV, the cars roof can't be crushed no matter how strong the imact is. Only the edges of a car roof can be crushed, but not completely. This is an example that R* strays away realism in a bad way.

Cars' roof CAN be crushed. I once made a huge crash and the roof was crushed as well.

There are only 5 residential vehicle parking spaces, which means you are forced to store few of your favorite cars into the parking space, since Rockstar Games refused to explain why.

Maybe they weren't asked, or they don't bother with people bitching about the hard work? And how many garages are there in New York City? Its mostly car parks. Garages are for the higher classes in New York City.

Surely 10 cars is enough?

Obviously not.

The parking spots are big enough for 2 vehicles, you can reuse the one in Broker even though that safehouse has been burnt. The only differences between the garage and these parking boxes (in terms of gameplay) is your cars being exposed to the elements and damage not repairing itself, and I've not a problem with either of those things.

There aren't enough 'realism' vehicles i.e. cement mixers, street sweepers, 'meter maids' etc - although not exactly amazing to look at or drive, they do add that extra touch of realism which would have fitted in with GTA IV's atmosphere perfectly.

Maybe because there isn't an cement being poured, or that Liberty City has decided to ruin is streets because of low budgets. And meter maids are those things on the side of the road where you park and put money in.

That's a parking meter a meter maid is this ('meter maid' being a nickname of course) and considering the amount of construction sites, it seems likely that cement trucks may be needed.

LOL. Where I live, a meter maid is actually the oppisite. As defined in Wikipedia. "Australia
The Surfers Paradise Meter Maids were introduced to the world in 1965 by local businessman Bernie Elsey to provide a positive spin on parking regulations. Instead of issuing tickets for expired parking, the Meter Maids dispensed coins into the meter and left a calling card under the windscreen wiper of the vehicle.
Initially introduced as a countermeasure against the unpopularity of parking meters installed the previous year, the Maids are known for their gold bikini outfits and (now defunct) tiaras.
Ticket-issuing parking inspectors continue to patrol streets to enforce parking regulations, and the Gold Coast City Council is installing voucher-dispensing parking machines in place of traditional parking meters, leaving 'meter maids' unable to top up the meter to protect vehicles from being fined by increasingly vigilant parking inspectors.". Now, they could have easily put parking meters on the sides of the road like they were trees. Lazy R*.

You don't even have first person mode (without bug) in trains nor possibility to walk in trains.

Why would you need first person view in trains when you can't drive them?

There is a 1st person view in the trains, open the cellphone camera.

Both the Sea Sparrow and the Leviathan helicopters were taken away for no reason whatsoever. Both of them are great which are used to land on water, but why remove them? Both helicopters were awesome.

GTA IV isn't a sea game.

They could include them if they had an aircraft carrier.

Go to New York, and count how many seaplanes you see, then get back to us.

It's a f***ing island, you can find many seaplanes there.

Even though every map in GTA is tiny, it's not supposed to be an island, it represents land much larger than that. Seaplanes don't fit into an urban setting without looking awkward. Besides that, why are you complaining about seaplanes when there are no regular planes to fly? - no wait, how did seaplanes even get in this gripe? It was about helicopters.

The Vortex hovercraft was taken away for no reason. It was a great vehicle, so why remove it?

Hovercraft aren't really common in New York City.

The BF Injection was removed. Just because it's a great vehicle and designed for off-roading, doesn't mean they can remove it for no reason at all.

Driving a dune buggy in NYC would be silly.

Not true. The BF Injection is a great vehicle that was designed for going off-road at the coast lines and driving around beaches and performing stunts.

Once again, Liberty City isn't about beaches. Go back to Los Angeles to find some beaches and dune buggies.

The majority of good cars were removed by Rockstar Games and they refused to explain why.

Rockstar doesn't answer to people who bitch about their hard work. Cars are removed due to that fact that THEY CAN'T FIT THEM IN THE GAME.

They could have fit more cars etc in the game if they'd put less emphasis on the graphics/physics.

If they had put less emphasis on the graphics/physics, then the game wouldn't be so good

Tow Truck was removed. This was a great vehicle that was used to tow rare vehicles and park into residential parking spaces, but they removed it for no reason at all.

Drive the car, don't tow it.

Even still, in a game that strives for realism, you'd think there would be at least a few tow trucks driving around a recreated NYC.

The Tow Truck is in TLAD, but it can't tow cars.

And THAT reduces realism in a whole new level. Was R* lazy to even program a functinal towing winch and then take the vehicle? Wow, that seemed redundant. They've done that in San Andreas, so there's just no excuse for them to add the Tow Truck and not add the towing feature. Puh-thetic.

I agree with you on the realism part of the gripe. R* has the excuse that in SA you couldn't jack locked cars so you would have to tow them to your garage but in 4 you can bust the window of locked cars, making towing almost useless. By ignoring the working tow feature R* would have had more time to work on more important, useful, or fun parts of the game.

The Packer's ramp doesn't touch the ground, so you can not do stunts (even though a pre-release screenshot shows a Sabre GT jumping off of one).

That was a beta mode of GTA IV, and things change while in beta.

{

OK? Why make the game worse for no reason?

It's just one tiny little error. How can it make the game worse?

Actually, if you look at the screenshot mentioned, there is no ramp between the Packer and the road, meaning that it was simply either a misleading pre-render, or a screenshot of a scripted scene (not in the final game obviously, like the screenshot of the limo with about 7 police cars along side it)

This doesn't change the fact that this is a legitimate gripe, and you've solved nothing.

Personal opinions aren't legitimate gripes.

So in your opinion, the ramp on a stunt truck shouldn't touch the ground? You'd make a horrible game developer!

But that's the thing, they're not stunt trucks. Firstly, they're for carrying cars, and secondly, don't you think it would be a bit stupid having the ramp scrape along the floor?

I would'nt think so. In real life, you can operate its ramp down. Besides, the Packer truck should elevate its suspension height, making it easy for the ramps to operate. I've seen real trucks with the ramp down and not scrape so low to the ground.

I live in NYC and see cars doing stunts off of Packer type trucks all the time. Yes, so not dangerous. SARCASM.

If you want a movable ramp so bad, in the PC version, you can spawn a Packer with its ramp down using a car spawner.

Auxilary lights (roof lights, grille lights) on vehicles do not work.

Niko doesn't have time to look flashy while in a chase, does he? And what if those lights were off for a reason?

He has time to turn the ice cream truck music on, doesn't he? What about when he's not in a chase? If GTA IV is trying to be 'more realistic', the lights should turn on.

Why would you want them on?

Perhaps for the same reason they are on the vehicle in the first place.

GTA is becoming more realistic right? The fog lights could help see when it gets foggy in Liberty City.

You don't see medics using all the lights on the abmulances, and there's only a few switches or buttons to be pressed in a real ambulance to make them work.

If it was possible to use a seatbelt, we wouldn't fly out of a car during a crash.

Niko does actually buckle his seatbelt. Get in a car and start the engine and wait. He does an extra motion after turning the key, which may be buckling the seatbelt.

That's him hotwiring the car.

Niko does not buckle a seatbelt (which explains why no seatbelt is seen, there is no buckling motion, and he flies out of the car when slamming into a wall).

Seatbelts aren't indestructable.

Assuming that Niko doesn't take out a knife and cut the seatbelt everytime he gets into a car, than there is no reason the seatbelt should break. "Seatbelts aren't indestructable" is a pointless, irrelevant statement.

Its leather (or whatever the fabric is) against gravity, what is going to win?

It's a synthetic woven fiber, not leather. It's inertia, not gravity. Seat belts are extremely strong, designed to handle much more than a human body can. Take a look at the underworkings in your car. The bolts that hold the seat belt mechanism to the ceiling is bigger than the bolts that hold the engine to the frame. As far as the game, I would've preferred if it were a mix between airbag deployment (on more conventional in-game sedans), seat belts (on sports cars), or windshield (cheaper cars).

If you're implying that gravity can tear leather, than you are an idiot. If you are implying that gravity has anything to do with a car crash, than you are an even bigger idiot. So which is it.
And to answer the first rebutter's answer, if Niko had his seatbelt on, how could he jump out and lean to shoot instantly?

Chances are, if you have a head-on crash you will either fly out of the car, or be seriously injured.

Please tell me the last time you heard of a seatbelt tearing. If you had a crash while wearing a seatbelt, you would be launched forward slightly, then be stopped by the seatbelt, the force would split your rib/ribs (depending on the velocity of the crash) and seeing as your internal organs would still be moving, if your rib cracked it would probably puncture a lung or something, and if your ribs were intact you would still damage your organs from the force of being thumped against your ribcage. My point being that he obviously doesn't use a seatbelt. ;)

LOL, actually, Dale Earnhardt Sr's seatbelt tore on the last lap of the 2001 Daytona 500 when he crashed. It was front page news! Do some research and watch the video and you'll see why. But why is it so annoying though? If you want him to stop flying out of the car, learn how to drive.

Why have the Annihilator, in the game, if you can't use it for misson's other that the one chasing after Pegorino or Dimitri.

The Annihilator was never meant for missions, and was only added for players to enjoy after completing the game.

Maybe, who knows,but at the same time, R* could have made some missions for use with the chopper,San Andreas also has a chopper, but the only time i saw it was in the training, no where else, unless you did a cheat code and spawned it

For the last time, this isn't San Andreas, and the story has been set, one way or another, without the Annihilator.

Forklifts may be drivable, but you can't operate forklifts to carry boxes anymore, which completely strays away realism and fun.

Now what is the point in using the fork lift for fun? How is it fun? It is useless, and that is why it was removed. Rockstar needed disk space for more import stuff.

You know it barely takes any disk space to program that stuff. But the forklift feature is pretty useless nevertheless.

Once again, we're robbed of the chance to pretend we're Steve McQueen in Bullitt because there's no car that accurately resembles the '68 Mustang GT 390. We've got a replica of the '68 Charger (the other car from the Bullitt car chase) in the form of the Dukes and a few other badass muscle cars, but where is the coolest muscle car of them all?

They need something for downloadable content.

Or a downloadable mod? Ive seen it on gtainside.de. Seriously, an old mustang :D

They took away the Cheetah, the handling king at high speed, and it looked good too.

They have replaced it with a newer, better car.

Which one, because the Infernus doesn't really handle well, a little bump and it flips over.

The Turismo is a modern rendition of the Cheetah. It resembles a Ferrari 360. The Cheetah used to resemble a Ferrari Testarossa therefore the Turismo is the new Cheetah.

Yeah, the Turismo is the new Cheetah, only with its acceleration atrocious, making this a so-called "new Cheetah" a bad choice.

The Turismo is a great car, but yes the acceleration is not as good. I wouldn't be surprised if they had the Cheetah as an Enzo Ferrari, a 612 Scaglietti, an FXX or another kind of modern day Ferrari in a car pack in the episodic content.

Ultraussie here, yeah, I know it sucks, like in GTA3 era games the Cheetah was the "cheap" Fezza, and the Turisimo was the "Daddy" fezza, but now the Turismo is the "cheap" fezza, and that sucks. Where does the Cheetah fit in now? In the next GTA they would have to make the Tursimo based off a better car in order for the Cheetah to fit in. Like, I dunno, now theres nothing to compete in the "Supercar Elite" kinda area, theres only the Infernus, and Comet.

The 1986 Ferrari Testarossa (Cheetah) was Ferrari's halo car at the time. In the 90's it was replaced by the front-engined V-12 550 Maranello. Today, the equivalent would be the 599 GTB. Now, I'd rather have the Testarossa based Cheetah back over a 599-based based Cheetah, but that's me, and I'm a huge fan of the Tesatrossa

Choppers handled better in GTA: SA

Helicopters aren't easy to fly, so they are made harder to fly in for more realism.

The Blackhawk does not handle like a Blackhawk. It handles like a jetranger. It's too jumpy. S-70s are big, stable helicopters (except when they're swallowing sand). The Raindance handled like a blackhawk should. The Annihilator acts like a Hunter. The Pedals need to be a little less sensitive so the nose could be kept on the target for more than 5 seconds...

You do not know that, have you ever flown in a helicopter? Rockstar only used the most exclusive and upfront references for the handling of all vehicles. And, go outside and watch someone fly a helicopter. They will barely move the stick-shift-thingy, and the helicopter will react very sensitively. Helicopters aren't as slow as dump trucks. And BlackHawks weren't made for taking down one man, but in fact a large group, and vehicles.

You are wrong on so many accounts. First, the Blackhawk can fly 130-140 mph. tops. An apache can only hit 140. Some sources say both types exceed 180 mph which is true...when they have a skeleton crew, no weapons, no cargo, and very little fuel. And it is a UTILITY HELICOPTER, UH. They are trucks, buddy. "The pilots barely move the controls" is a relative statement. What you see from outside the cockpit and what you feel on the controls are two vastly different things. I'm not a rotary wing pilot, but I've got my multi-engine license and I have flown helicopters before; MD 530s and Bell 204s with supervision.

GTA IV doesn't use helicopters as trucks. Look somewhere else.

This is a GRIPE PAGE. I have made a legitimate gripe. Go find me a pic of a blackhawk, let alone a police hawk, with four miniguns. How about YOU look somewhere else to fulfill your inferiority complex, because it won't work on me. If Blackhawks in the game carried a full complement (10 troops + 2 door gunners + 2 pilots), even minus the door gunners, full-blown heliborne assaults could be carried out, which would be sweet in multiplayer.

The vehicles in GTA IV only resemble real life vehicles. so an annihilator, not a blackhawk, might be that sensitive.

I don't think that some airforce officers would sit in a helicopter and let a random person fly it, let alone a convicted criminal, and not do anything.

I'm sorry you're under the impression that it is an Air Force helicopter...it's not. Secondly, it's grand THEFT auto. And officers don't fly...warrant officers do, which are enlisted men. What exactly was the point you were trying to make...because you've lost it.

About the Blackhawk being a UH-60...well, it um resembles the MH-60 helicopter one of my reletives flys. Which has big minguns. But you could say that the MH-60 doesnt have wing mounted miniguns. Well, take a look at the AH-60.

Firstly, I don't know about console controls, but with keyboard controls the helicopters in GTA SA were very difficult and twitchy to fly. Flying in GTA IV with a keyboard is much smoother and easier. Secondly, it's not important which variant it most closely resembles, the Annihilator in GTA IV is definitely based on the Sikorsky S-70 'Black Hawk'. The four miniguns configuration may not be common in the real world but it's plausible. The AH-60 gunship variety of the Blackhawk typically has at least one minigun mounted on the wing, as well as rockets, guided missiles and an autocannon. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to replace all of those other weapons with more miniguns, just not particularly practical. (The other weapons are more useful)

No Romero funeral car for everyone to drive around the LC? How dissapointing. Sure it can be driven by one mission, but regardless of going into any churches you see, the Romero is never to be seen again.

When you die, do you want your corpse to be stolen because some guy wanted a hearse?

That would be impossible, as Niko dies many time he gets, yet never stays dead. What I'm saying is that I wish there was people driving the Romero for me to steal it.

I'm not talking about when Niko dies. I'm talking about when you die. By the way what kind of sick, heartless person would steal a hearse during a funeral or from the church. Even Niko, the most badass hitman ever, would at least show some respect for the dead and the church.

[sarcasm] Yes, that's right, everyone apologize for disrespecting virtual dead people. Hey, polygons need to rest in peace too! [/sarcasm] P.S At the other point respect for the church, unless you are religious I don't see why you should respect the church any more than you respect any other building.

The church is considered the "House of God" and if you were Christian, maybe you'd understand. I'm not particularly religious either, but I still respect the Church more than other buildings.

By church, I think he means regilous people. Learn to mod files. I used to have hearses instead of buses.

I'm an Epsilonist and I wouldn't rob religious buildings,no matter what the religion.That's disrespectful to their religions.Kifflom brother-brother.

Just steal the Romero after the mission where you take one of the McReary's to the gravesite. You can easily stop it as it

((Rebut))In the other games the Romero featured in, I dont remember it being driven around, it was a rare vehicle (not as rare in SA). But, seriously, that Epsilonist reference was pretty good :D...

.......... But of course, there's nothing wrong with stealing a hearse if there is No Coffin inside or it is of private property, which is usally the case. The Church isn't a funeral company you know.

Why the Buffalo is never seen driving around the streets of Liberty City? It is a good vehicle, yet the only variation they added the FIB version of the Buffalo, and not a civilian model. A dissapointing effort.

They'll probably have the regular Buffalo in a car pack in the episodic content

And 'whoop dee do' your problem is solved! get TBOGT

How long is this going to take? I mean, the fans here does'nt want any game of patience when R* now focuses on the PC version (which I doubt it will happen, because no computer can handle THAT) and the GTA game for the Wii and DS (which I think it's a GTA 2-esque game, and the top view sucked).

Remember when GTA IV came out? They said it would come out between February and April if I'm correct. It came out the last week of April. These things take a long time. It will probably come out in late January, December if were lucky. Just wait. It'll come. Once Rockstar is done with GTA IV for PC and Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars, then they'll focus on the episodic content.

The Sultan RS may be an excellent vehicle, but is rendered unsellable as Stevie won't accept this vehicle, making realism a total let-down.

Perhaps Stevie will not accept the Sultan RS because it is filled with aftermarket parts, and Stevie has no use for aftermarket products. If Stevie is running a standard chop shop, he would want stock parts, not a bunch of carbon junk.

Wish that R* wouldn't make a dumb decision into not storing vehicles in garage, which is much safer and easy to store. The yellow boxes are too few and is completely stupid that you're forced to store up to 10 vehicles, rather than keep 30 vehicles or more.

Niko is not meant to have a lot of money in the main storyline.

Real estate is sparse in Liberty City, and a parking spot is tough to find at rush hour, even for tenants. The dedicated parking spaces work as advertised, and problems do arise when one tries to push the limits of the space.

Jimmy Pegfaces house has a working garage. Not sure you can save in it, but its a nice place to park when your using his swimming pool.

The Airtug does'nt attach luggages from the back, like you do that in GTA: SA, thus making realism really disappointing.

Who cares. It was a completely useless feature and it does not affect gameplay.

Let's just take out the television, the radio stations, the badges on the cars, the themes on the phone, the funny websites on the internet, the tourist attractions and landmarks scattered around the city, the easter eggs, the comedy club acts, the cabaret acts, the clothing system and the strip club, and see if you're happier with the game. After all, these are also useless features that do not affect gameplay. :)

Those things are what make GTA fun and those things do affect gameplay. What's so fun about going around with a baggage handler and attaching luggage from the back? You'd have to be retarded to think that's "fun".

I am not retarded but it can be fun. For example, it may be fun to do a stunt jump and the luggage could fly everywhere and can go all over vehicles. It would be quite funny to see a pair of boxers on a smart, sparkling sport car like the Infernus.

{Gripe}}That would be cool. Yeah, I used a ripped version of SA, so I only get teh bare basics. No radio, and no cutscene speach. No ingame speech etc.. And its a hell of a fun game. Who seriously wastes there time going to in game "Comedy clubs", and why did R* bother getting real life celeb comedians to do it? Yeah, I loved it in SA drivng a towtruck train (slightly unrealistic, but there was only 1 towtruck spawn so it oviously wasnt meant to happen ingame without a trainer), and I loved derailing a 50 car long train and then making it fly. And yeah, Attaching Trailers to trucks wouldnt of taken much space on the little DVD disk, it was in SA.... Or doesnt a big rig fit in a city? Well, Big Rigs go through cities all the time. Once they get the trailer they have to deliver it somewhere...

The only thing I like about IV in terms of Airpots is all the FlyUS brand cars, my fav is the ripley.
And also, the Packer doesnt have the ramp touching the ground, making it usless.. They couldve made it so u can lwoer and raise it!

The evolution of the cars is getting awkward, designs change significantly what appears in like a couple years (the cars they're based on can even be from around the same year and somehow the design still changes form one to the other) as does the class and type of car they are.

Unlike games in the GTA III Era, GTA IV is set in 2008. Car designs change over time, and basing the cars ingame off real ones adds to realism, but R* couldn't directly rip off a car because that would result in copyright infringement. (take the Dillettante, it's apparently a cross between a Toyota Prius and a Citroen C4).

I get what your saying but how the actual designs change is strange take the Primo for example, in GTASA it was an affordable family car now in GTA IV you could say it is luxury sport sedan, the cars they are based on are from about the same year... How can it just change significantly over a very short time? with some cars such as the Buffalo, Bobcat, Emperor, Mannana, Primo, etc. I guess the guys at Rockstar based the change on how the name fits with those vehicles rather than what would be a realistic change (the one with the Emperor isn't so bad though). Heres another example the Buffalo was based on a Camaro, all of them ever made had 2 doors but just because the name fits well with a Dodge vehicle (with rams and such :)) it is now a 4 door. And they could've reused names for some vehicles rather than making new ones or having unrealistic evolutions (like reusing Buffalo or Phoenix for the Ruiner; Majestic for the Faction; Yosemite for the Bobcat; etc.). The car brands also make this troubling. Thats just my irrational opinion though.

Despite all that room in the limo, only 4 people can sit in it. Plus, there's a TV inside that's unusable.

The limo in GTA has always been that way. There are no vehicles (to my knowledge anyway) that hold more than 4 people in the main storyline. And the TV...well, hardly anyone watches TV for one thing. And it'd just be impractical to have it available in a car. How many people would actually be able to use it? You can't even go first-person view in a car without using the phone.

The cars understeer like cows.--Roflnova 08:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Driving now requires a little more finesse than simply mashing the accelerator and maybe applying the brake every now and again. I can make corners at top speed with a fast, heavy car, and I'm sure you could too, with a bit of practice.

TIP - Brake before the corner not through it (like in real life), so you dont lock the wheels and continue going forward.

not enough special features for emergency vehicles eg lights can be turned on while in vehicle without sirens,police vehicle spotlight also R* should have added a ladder truck (maybe with a usable ladder) and realistic fire truck sirens and be able to have sirens and a horn at the same time....just thoughts on how to improve variety...and free roam capabilities

What would be the point of that though? Why would you need to turn the lights on? What use would you have for a spotlight, you're the only one who ever commits major crimes. Where would you go with a ladder truck? There arn't many climbable buildings of any interest. Plus there would probably be scripting issues with a ladder and a vehicle, as ladders require a button to be pressed to climb them, which is Y/Triangle IIRC, the same one used to enter vehicles. Why would you need a horn and sirens? The siren is a continuous horn, it makes people get out of the way. Most people just ignore horns.

It is kind of silly to put things on vehicles that aren't used (the rest of the lights on the Ambulance, the spotlight and TrafficMaster on the Police Patrol And Cruiser, extra lights on vehicles, etc.)

I know this is a little gripe, but i think the cardoors open too stiffly. They opened better in GTA SA.

In GTA SA you practiclly ripped the doors off cars! I think the car-door opening in GTA IV is more realistic.

The opening stiffly seems reasonably realistic but they close to easily. It was fun in older GTAs to just have a door swinging out of control and trying to close it by swerving around.

In my opinion, more car dealerships should've been put into the game. Some cars on the street are extremely hard to find, like the Infernus for example. The Grotti dealer could've made a good multi-exotic car dealership. So instead of just the Turismo in the car dealership, there would've been an Infernus, a Super GT, a Comet, etc. Also, another good car dealership Rockstar could've put in was the landmark GM Building on 59th St. and 5th Ave (FYI, there WAS a car dealership there but it's now a toystore, but it wouldn't make sense for there to be a toystore since there are no kids in GTA IV). There could've been cars like the Coquette or the Cavalcade there, as both cars are made by GM. But Rockstar only put 2 car dealerships in the game and one bike dealership. It makes no sense to have just 2 car dealerships in one huge city. After all, the game is called Grand Theft AUTO.

I agree, particularly in regards to the rare cars angle. It's not fair that the nicest sportscars in the game spawn once in a blue moon when parking space is so limited. They could at least replace the random crappy cars that spawn at AutoErotiCar with sportscars, as advertised on their deceptive website. Grr.

Amen.

Why just 1 single big rig in a huge Liberty City? Sure, the Phantom is ok, but what happened to the Linerunner and the Roadtrain? I thought it's supposed to be realistic. The Phantom is nowhere near as fast as the other two and it's impossible to reach up to 100 mph to slam head-on to a car nearby. I've never seen the Phantom such a terrible vehicle to handle or have its acceleration flimsy.

The only way the LCPD uses FIB Buffalos is if they steal them if you cheat one, and in ONE mission in TLAD. I'd like to see unmakred Police Cruisers, Police Patrols, and marked/unmarked LCPD Buffalos. Go look up NYPD Charger if you say "NYPD doesn't use Chargers!"

All the vehicles handle terrible, no matter how good they are (because everytime you go over a bump at medium speeds, your car rolls over for no reason). They handled better in San Andreas.

Having recently loaded up GTA:SA for the purposes of comparison, I find that the vehicles handle in a terribly precise and unrealistic manner. In fact, most of the physics in the game are very unrealistic. I too initially felt that the cars in GTAIV handled poorly, but now that I am used to it, I could never go back.

How come there's no Elegy? I would've loved to have seen it return in GTA IV, maybe looking like the new Nissan GT-R. Maybe give it a Silvia S15's arse. And what about the Euros, that delightful rip-off of the 300ZX? I would have love to see Rockstar bring it back and give it a Skyline GT-R's arse but a 370Z's face.]] DriftKing18594

Well, if you're looking for street racing cars, there's always the Sultan and Sultan RS, plus the Coquette is a great drifting car. GTA IV was less about street racing, as New York City, which Liberty is based off of, is not as big on street as California (Where street racing practically originated) is.

This is a just a little detail I don't like: Cars don't have combined-function taillights like in real-life, they can't be dim for night and fully light up while braking or while using the turn signals. Instead the lights are divided into sections that only do one thing, this just doesn't look right and because of it some real-lifish cars with simple taillights can't be emulated more accurately.

Actually, they do. While some cars don't have combined-function taillights, others do. Taillights are only on at night (though they should come on when you turn on the headlights manually), and they will be brighter when you break. But I will say that they could have added a brakelight bar like many cars today have.

Some do have combined function-lights but even even then the whole red sections of the taillight doesn't light up completey, I think the Vapid Taxi/Cruiser is the only car that really pulls this off. It's just such a shame to not see the Emperor's taillights shine completley in their Cadillac glory (maybe a cheesey exageration but it still annoys me).

It is really dumb that you can't lock the doors in cars that you find or steal. This applies to all GTA games. Especially GTAIV. It makes me angry when people who are trying to be good samaritans come and pull me out of my car and try to beat me up or shoot me, or when cops can just walk up to my car and hold me up. There is no reason such a simple and realistic feature could not be included. Some might say that it could hinder Niko from getting out of his car quickly, but the reality is that most modern cars are set up to that using the door handle automatically unlocks the door from the inside.PiccoloNamek 22:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't that nice car you parked almost certainly be one you stole? I know there are some exceptions, in which you are given a car, but at least 90% of the time, the cars you use are ones that you stole. Since many will be ones that were locked, parked cars, and you hot wired them to get them started, there will be no keys to lock/unlock those cars if you parked them. Therefore, why include an animation for locking a car, even though you may not have the keys for it? And the thing about the door handle unlocking the car, there are several things wrong with that and this game. 1-Somehow, Niko has to reset the previous owner's setting (and I have no clue how to do that, considering I've never seen a car with that ability in real life, other than in commercials), and does he really have the time to fiddle with that? 2-Not all cars have that feature. It is actually pretty new technology, usually only available on luxury cars. 2.5- It isn't even most modern cars. Only some of them.

I meant that using the inside door handle automatically, physically unlocks the door. Also, Niko could lock the door when he gets inside, but leave it unlocked when he gets out. What I am concerned with is having the car locked while I am driving it to prevent thugs and cops from getting into my car. Once I am outside the car, I couldn't care less if it is locked or not.

When you stop at a traffic light (red light) or at any other traffic signals (stop sign, etc.), other traffic cars insist upon trying to pass you, more often then not hitting you in the process. This is just an annoying little detail for those of us that don't feel like driving like a crazy person all the time, and just want to drive normally every once in a while.

Yeah, and when they hit you, they act like it was your fault too. Sometimes they will even get out of their cars!

One time I was driving a car home for Stevie, so I was being careful not to crash, and a police car crashed into me while I was at lights, and then I got a wanted level like you always to for hitting a police car.

(From OP) Well, the police car thing I understand, considering how if a police car hits you in real life, they will stop, check on you, make sure everyone is ok, and file a report. In GTA IV, they likely will notice that you're a wanted criminal in a stolen car, and arrest you, since they now have grounds to do so. Also, when taxi drivers hit you and pull you out of your car to beat you up, they might just have serious anger problems. I bet they go crazy driving in traffic like that all day, every day. I think that Rockstar also may have set up an aggression rating for each character model, which would explain alot. But that's just a theory of mine.

I swear to god if one more car tries to pass me I will blow up every car i see

The buzzword of now appears to be "realism" which can explain away a lot of these. Many of them wouldn't really be apt in 2008 Liberty City. For example, there's no place you can go rally driving, no racing ring, no fields to harvest. You're not going to see Niko riding a bike either, he's just not that kind of person. The Pizzaboy I'll accept as a legitimate gripe, although really it's naught but a recoloured Faggio. People drive differently on the East Coast, they talk about it a lot early on in SA...

What about the Vortex, the Journey, the Hotdog (and I don't mean a hot dong stand, I mean a Hot dog truck) and even the Hotknife? The Hotknife would be ideal for street races, and I would like to see the new Journey (in its new E-Series form) driven around somewhere.

No bikes.

Solvable depending on whether or not you have a 360, PS3, or PC. If you have the former, then download The Lost And Damned from LIVE: I think it adds bikes. If you have the latter, sorry.

I think he's talking about bicycles.

I've seen the TLAD Bike list. The Bike list takes up half the page!And most new bikes have custom versions to them!

Way too hard to do a wheelie with any bike except for the Faggio.

Hmm... I'd take that as realism. After all, superbikes are coated with plastic and moving fast, and choppers are too long. Faggios are perfect because they have very little "skin", they're lightweight, and are DIRT BIKES, so they can obviously wheelie.

yeah but the faggios are weird i want to do it with the NRG or the PCJ not with the Sanchez or the Faggio.

They are easy to do on the NRG and PCJ.

What the hell did they do to the Slamvan? it used to be cool

The Slamvan can be driven in TLAD, but I wish R* would AT LEAST feature DLC packs for vehicles for the PS3 version. Not that hard, unless R* wants to be cheap.

Yeah, they need to make some DLC vehicle packs, ones for certain classes, like a tuner one , a muscleone, a sports car one, etc.

No, I meant, the slamvan looks dumb now, It was a lot cooler whan it was a lowrider truck

That's an opinion. I for one quite like the look of the new Slamvan, GTAIV lacks "older" vehicles.

This is nothing big or anything. But the Packer with the gas tank on the back doesen't have a massive explosion. It would add realism if it would explode massivly.

Just suppose that it's empty :P.

And just suppose that it’s NOT empty. Since when was every fuel truck on the road empty?

If GTA IV is supposed to be about realism, is it too much to ask for a button for a convertible's top to be able to go up or down? How many people honestly drive around with the top down in the rain?

IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE GAMEPLAY. I think GTA SA had WAY TOO many useless features that were annoying as hell.

Well it does affect realism badly, not the gameplay itself. In real life, how often do you ever see a person driving around in a convertible with the roof open in a middle of a rain? THAT'S not realistic.

Niko doesn't care if he gets wet though. It's not an integral part of the gameplay mechanic and would likely have taken unnecessary hours to perform and add into the game. Plus you'd have to consider damage deformation and other-such factors. It would just be impractical and pointless, purely eye-candy.

No special vehicles which are parked in certain places that activates a side mission when getting in. Guess Rockstar must be pushing realism WAY too far. Side missions with vehicles are the best, so there's just no reason to leave that awesome feature dead.

Just think for a moment. How realistic is it that you would get into a van and take control of an RC plane, or into an ambulance and suddenly become a qualified paramedic? You still have the Vigilante missions with the police cars, so the whole “No special vehicle missions” thing is null.

Probably my biggest problem with the vehicles is that their scaling and proportions are wrong. Since when is a Honda CRX as long as a Corvette? The pillars of most cars also lean in too much compared to their real-life counterparts (ex. Landstalker, Fortune, Ingot), It wasn't that bad in older GTAs. Ground clearance is also messed for some cars. I know they aren't supposed to be 100% correct but it just takes a little research.

The thing is though, these cars AREN'T the real life ones. If they were, they'd have real-life names and Rockstar would likely have to pay thousands in royalties to the car companies. They're enough to HINT at what they really look like, if they really did look like the real things there'd be no point in giving them unique names or whatever. If you want realistic cars and such, go play PGR or Gran Turismo.

I am aware of that, but the pillar thing I have a problem with, is not natural for any car to look like that. And a sport car can't be as long as a compact hatchback, it looks wrong. They bothered to base cars off real-life ones that's already taking a risk, The scaling is much broader than the actual styling, so why cant they get the scaling right? It's not like it makes the cars more unique looking or harder to identify, it just makes them look wrong.

would be able to hear a radio on a bike would helmet and connect it to the bike. I have checked all of the available cycles and none have any kind of radio on them. Anyone care to explain?

There have always been radios on motorcycles in GTA, I think it adds alot of mood when you have music playing. But if you want no music then just turn the radio off.

I would have liked there to be more rare supercars, for example: A Bugatti Veyron equivalent, or something like a Koenigsegg CCX.

This is almost a wishlist request. And if you have more super cars, theres gonna need to be a lot more regular cars to keep things in proportion. I just hate when supercars are the main thing in a game, regular cars are fun too.

Also keep in mind that TBOGT is going to focus a lot more on these "glamour" vehicles.

{ good point dawg. plus we already know there will be at least 3 more nice cars added to BOGT

When I go at my top speed on an NRG 900 and slam into a Cavalcade going the OPPOSITE direction of me, i dont die and emerge without much damage. But when i accidentally flip a bit and land face first on my NRG, I die....WTF?

The keyword is face-first. Your brain is obviously behind your face, no more explanation is really needed.

If you're traveling at top speed on a bike and crash head-on into a huge SUV, your brain will come out your ass, no more explanation is really needed.

What's up with that? Why does R* have to replace the awesome Blista van for the, simply put, "Minivan"? I liked the Blista van a whole lot and should've been featured in GTA IV, but no. R* always make cheap decisions into replacing the unique Blista van into just "Minivan".

The Minivan is a close replacement for the Blista, I think if it was called the Blista you wouldn't care, they are basically the same van. And theres always the Perenial.

I thought GTA IV was about Realism. Securicars are so simple to steal, just pull a car in front of it and jack it. while in Real Life, if you try to steal a Armored Truck, the State Police and FBI would show up.

Yea, I want like that. =.=

The cops actually show up when you blow the Securicar.

No custom high-performance 4x4 pick-up trucks or SUVs like the Sandking and Cartel Cruiser. True, there aren't many places to four-wheel, but imagine running from the cops or picking up a girlfriend in a bad boy like this: [1]

Yeah, I want those in future GTA (realistic in like in GTA IV) games.

The Irish gang in Dukes drive custom Contenders that are fairly quick.

just a little thing, but how come there are no unmarked vans in gta4? i dont like rolling around in a van that has "Pharte Gas" on the side. its also highly unrealistic that no vans in LC would not have company decals on them.

If you're driving an unmarked van in real life, the cops would try to arrest you because it'll look suspicous.

The Annihilator isn't good enough to fill the role of the attack helicopter because 1. it has no rockets, 2. it's guns are very inacuratte and weak 3. I managed to destroy it with only 3 rounds of the weakest pistol in the game

You know something, I take it back. It's Ok enough

i had an infernus a gt tursmo a tursimo a bansheee in one parking lot and a comet a fertizers in another and when i went back to the one parking ot and the infernus and banshee where gone i ruled out out carjacking and expodingb of i have no idea what happned but it really pissed me off (ps my grammer and spelling is bad because i get aollot of lag when griping on these pages and my L button has become stiff)

This is what they call a car eating glitch it happens when too many vehicles are stored in one parking are, it isn't Rockstar's fault

When you get on a motorcycle on gta 4 and TBOGT a helmet appears from nowhere, how is that realistic?

Niko or Luis probably had it with them or it was on the motorcycle

Pay 'n' Spray does not allow you to choose the colour for your car, Having to keep driving repeatedly in to the garages to get the colour you want gets annoying.

The Corquette is based of a corvette, yet no yellow variants can be found, there is a red one but it is a corvette not a ferrari, the rest of the corvettees are either black, white or grey

In BoGT, new police vehicles are featured in multiplayer, but not in single palyer. What gives? It'd be cool to have new police vehicles in single player and they chase after you and store one of the unique vehicles, like the Police Stinger.

No seatbelts? Really? For a game that tried to add a little bit more realism, it was too hard to add a small millisecond of Niko/Johnny/Luis fastening a seatbelt. With all motorbikes, They ca put helmets on if you don't start riding immediately. With the helmets, if you bail off a bike while wearing a helmet, you get much less damage as opposed to without one. Why not at least make a small update adding seatbelts to GTA IV, to prevent the likelyhood of bailing from the window in a frontal collision. Also, as a disadvantage almost, the seatbelts could takeaway precious time unfastening them if you need to ditch a vehicle. --It's an automatic. For when you need it done. 01:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)Automatic Grand Theft

The Annihilator sucks in GTA IV. The guns on the Annihilator will not fire if fired for a prolonged time. But the Buzzard in TBOGT, the miniguns don't overheat. Why?! And don't tell me
like 'To balance gameplay'. Are the miniguns supposed to overheat? Being the only attack helicopter in GTA IV, it sucks.

The motorcycles in GTA IV are really hard to control. Due to realistic physics in the game, it becomes hard to control bikes in GTA IV. In I Need Your Clothes, Boots and Motorcycle, It took me a lot of tries to complete the mission. Players who are not used to the game have a hard time controlling a motorcycle. Due to moving to 7th generation consles, gamers who are used to 6th generation consles can have a hard time.